When 27-year-old Democratic National Committee (DNC) staffer Seth Rich was shot dead in Washington, D.C., on July 8, 2016, the news had just broken that WikiLeaks was publishing a trove of embarrassing and damning DNC e-mails. And while the official story is that the leaked e-mails had nothing to do with Rich’s murder, that story falls apart under scrutiny.

That official story is that Rich was killed during a robbery in an area of the city with escalating levels of crime, including armed robbery. But when Rich — who was shot twice in the back at close range — was found, nothing was missing. He was still wearing his watch and expensive jewelry, he still had his phone and his wallet. His father said, “If it was a robbery — it failed because he still has his watch, he still has his money — he still has his credit cards, still had his phone so it was a wasted effort except we lost a life.”

Last week, The New American published a video of an exclusive interview with legendary political operative Roger Stone, who made it clear that he does not buy the official story. He said, “It is very clear that Seth Rich was murdered for political purposes” and not in a random robbery. He said Rich was murdered because he was the source of the DNC e-mails published by WikiLeaks.

Directly tied to all of this is the DNC claim that the e-mails were “hacked” by Russian operatives and that WikiLeaks is merely the publishing arm of the Kremlin. In truth, the e-mails weren’t “hacked” at all. As this writer reported in December 2016, Craig Murray, a former British ambassador working as an operative for WikiLeaks, said that he received the e-mails from a intermediary in a clandestine meeting in northwest Washington, D.C. He said the e-mails were provided to WikiLeaks by a disgruntled DNC employee who had “legal access” to them.

The same day the video of Stone’s interview was published, the Washington Times ran an analysis/opinion piece written by retired Navy Admiral James A. Lyons that said essentially the same thing. Lyons wrote:

The facts that we know of in the murder of the DNC staffer, Seth Rich, was that he was gunned down blocks from his home on July 10, 2016. Washington Metro police detectives claim that Mr. Rich was a robbery victim, which is strange since after being shot twice in the back, he was still wearing a $2,000 gold necklace and watch. He still had his wallet, key and phone. Clearly, he was not a victim of robbery.

This has all the earmarks of a targeted hit job. However, strangely no one has been charged with this horrific crime, and what is more intriguing is that no law enforcement agency is even investigating this murder. According to other open sources, Metro police were told by their “higher ups” that if they spoke about the case, they will be immediately terminated. It has been claimed that this order came down from very high up the “food chain,” well beyond the D.C. mayor’s office. Interesting.

Lyons also said that an FBI agent reported his gun stolen from his car near the area Rich was shot. That theft took place just before Rich’s murder.

Lyons also addressed the ridiculousness of the claim that the leaked DNC e-mails were the result of Russian hacking. He — like Stone — believes the obvious conclusion is the one supported by facts: Seth Rich provided WikiLeaks with the DNC e-mails and was killed for it.

The evidence certainly does point in that direction. This writer wrote in two articles — published May 16, 2017 and May 24, 2017 — of the convincing evidence that Rich was the source of the e-mails. The first of those two articles points out that, while WikiLeaks has a policy not to reveal sources, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange appeared on the Dutch television program Nieuwsuur to discuss the DNC leaks and said, “Whistleblowers go to significant efforts to get us material and often very significant risks. As a 27 year-old, works for the DNC, was shot in the back, murdered just a few weeks ago for unknown reasons as he was walking down the street in Washington.”

When asked to clarify, Assange said, “So ... I’m suggesting that our sources take risks and they become concerned to see things occurring like that.” Pressed as to whether he was saying Rich was the source, Assange answered, “We don’t comment on who our sources are.” When asked why he would “make the suggestion” about Rich, Assange came closer than ever to implying that there was a connection. “Because we have to understand how high the stakes are in the United States and that our sources are — our sources face serious risks,” Assange said, adding, “That’s why they come to us, so we can protect their anonymity.”

WikiLeaks also offered a $20,000 reward for information leading to the conviction of Rich’s killer.

That article also addressed statements made by Rod Wheeler, a former D.C. homicide detective who is now a private investigator and was working for the Rich family. He had stated that the laptop computer belonging to Seth Rich shows that he had been in contact with WikiLeaks.

The second article — from May 24, 2017 — covers the claims of Internet entrepreneur and political party founder Kim Dotcom that he knows Rich was WikiLeaks’ source because, he says, he communicated with Rich about it.

Lyons addresses those same statements and more in his piece for the Washington Times. And Stone shared even more in his video interview with The New American.

Considering all the evidence on the one side and the lack of it on the other side, the math just doesn’t add up to a robbery-gone-bad. It looks more and more like Seth Rich got fed up with what he saw at DNC HQ, leaked the e-mails to WikiLeaks, and was murdered for it. But given all the various and sundry crimes that Hillary Clinton and her accomplices have gotten away with where there was even more evidence than there is here, it is not likely anything will come of it.

Image: mbbirdy via E+ / Getty Images

Please review our Comment Policy before posting a comment

Thank you for joining the discussion at The New American. We value our readers and encourage their participation, but in order to ensure a positive experience for our readership, we have a few guidelines for commenting on articles. If your post does not follow our policy, it will be deleted.

No profanity, racial slurs, direct threats, or threatening language.

No product advertisements.

Please post comments in English.

Please keep your comments on topic with the article. If you wish to comment on another subject, you may search for a relevant article and join or start a discussion there.

Comments that we consider abusive, spammy, off-topic, or harassing will be removed.

If our filtering system detects that you may have violated our policy, your comment will be placed in a queue for moderation. It will then be either approved or deleted. Once your comment is approved, it will then be viewable on the discussion thread.

If you need to report a comment, please flag it and it will be reviewed. Thank you again for being a valued reader of The New American.